VIKRAMADITYA SINGH Vs. PRAKASH CHAND GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By view of this petition, challenge is made to the orders dtd. 29/2/2024, 29/8/2025 and 3/9/2025 passed by the trial Court. By the order dtd. 29/2/2024, the trial Court has rejected application under Order XXXVII Rules 2 and 3 CPC filed by the defendant and taken the written statement of the defendant on record. By the order dtd. 29/8/2025, the trial Court has framed issues in the case and by order dtd. 3/9/2025, the trial Court has posted the case for plaintiff's evidence.

(2.) The present petition has been filed by the petitioner/plaintiff who is aggrieved by the aforesaid order to the extent that the trial Court is proceeding in the matter like a regular suit and that the trial Court is not proceeding ahead in the matter by adopting the procedure of summary suit under Order XXXVII CPC. It is the contention of the petitioner that since the suit has been filed as a summary suit, therefore, the trial Court ought not to have taken the written statement on record and framed the issues, or posted the case for plaintiff's evidence because no leave to defend has been sought by the defendant and in such circumstances, the suit cannot be tried like a regular suit. By placing reliance on the plaint, it is contended that the suit is for recovery of Rs.4,27,60,000.00 and it is clearly captioned as a suit under Order XXXVII CPC as it is based upon an agreement and promissory note and is covered under Order XXXVII CPC to be dealt with like a summary suit and the petitioner had filed summary suit by exercising statutory right granted to the petitioner to file a summary suit. However, the trial Court is erroneously proceeding ahead in the suit like a regular suit.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has further vehemently argued that the trial Court even did not issue summons in Form-IV in Appendix-B which is required to be issued in case of summary suit and even the notices issued in the case were faulty. It is further argued that the trial Court ought not to have proceeded in the suit in question like an ordinary suit, once no leave to defend has been sought by the defendant.